Hearing on “Harmful Algal Blooms: The Challenges on the Nation’s Coastlines”

July 10, 2008Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee. I am Donald M. Anderson, a Senior Scientist
in the Biology Department of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, where I have been
active in the study of red tides and harmful algal blooms (HABs) for 30 years. I am here to
provide the perspective of an experienced scientist who has investigated many of the harmful
algal bloom (HAB) phenomena that affect coastal waters of the United States and the world. I
am also Director of the U.S. National Office for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algal Blooms,
co-Chair of the National HAB Committee, and have been actively involved in formulating the
scientific framework and agency partnerships that support and guide our national program on
HABs. Thank you for the opportunity to acquaint you with the challenges posed to the U.S. and
other countries by HABs, the present status of our research progress, options for prevention,
control, and mitigation, and the future programmatic actions that are needed to maintain and
expand this important national program. Other than a few general comments, I will restrict my
comments to marine HABs, as testimony on freshwater HABs is being provided by my colleague
Dr. Kenneth Hudnell.

Background

Among the thousands of species of microscopic algae at the base of the marine food chain are a
few dozen which produce potent toxins. These species make their presence known in many
ways, sometimes as a massive “bloom” of cells that discolor the water, sometimes as dilute,
inconspicuous concentrations of cells noticed only because they produce highly potent toxins
which either kill marine organisms directly, or transfer through the food chain, causing harm at
multiple levels. The impacts of these phenomena include mass mortalities of wild and farmed
fish and shellfish, human intoxications or even death from contaminated shellfish or fish,
alterations of marine trophic structure through adverse effects on larvae and other life history
stages of commercial fisheries species, and death of marine mammals, seabirds, and other
animals.

Blooms of toxic algae are commonly called “red tides,” since the tiny plants sometimes increase
in abundance until they dominate the planktonic community and sometimes make the water
appear discolored. The term is misleading, however, since toxic blooms may be greenish or
brownish, non-toxic species can bloom and harmlessly discolor the water, and, conversely,
adverse effects can occur when some algal cell concentrations are low and the water is clear.
Given the confusion, the scientific community now uses the term “harmful algal bloom” or
HAB.

HAB phenomena take a variety of forms and have a variety of impacts. With regard to human
health, the major category of impact occurs when toxic phytoplankton are filtered from the water
as food by shellfish which then accumulate the algal toxins to levels that can be lethal to humans
or other consumers. These poisoning syndromes have been given the names paralytic, diarrhetic,
neurotoxic, azaspiracid, and amnesic shellfish poisoning (PSP, DSP, NSP, AZP, and ASP). All
have serious effects, and some can be fatal. Except for ASP, all are caused by biotoxins
synthesized by a class of marine algae called dinoflagellates. ASP is produced by diatoms that
until recently were all thought to be free of toxins and generally harmless. A sixth human illness,
ciguatera fish poisoning (CFP) is caused by biotoxins produced by dinoflagellates that grow on
seaweeds and other surfaces in coral reef communities. Ciguatera toxins are transferred through
the food chain from herbivorous reef fishes to larger carnivorous, commercially valuable finfish.
Yet another human health impact from HABs occurs when a class of algal toxins called the
brevetoxins becomes airborne in sea spray, causing respiratory irritation and asthma-like
symptoms in beachgoers and coastal residents, typically along the Florida and Texas shores of
the Gulf of Mexico. Macroalgal or seaweed blooms also fall under the HAB umbrella.
Excessive seaweed growth, often linked to pollution inputs, can displace natural underwater
vegetation, cover coral reefs, and wash up on beaches, where the odor of masses of decaying
material is a serous deterrent to tourism. Finally, another poorly understood human illness linked
to toxic algae is caused by the dinoflagellate Pfiesteria piscicida and related organisms (e.g.,
Karlodinium) that have been linked to symptoms such as deficiencies in learning and memory,
skin lesions, and acute respiratory and eye irritation – all after exposure to estuarine waters
where Pfiesteria-like organisms have been present (Burkholder and Glasgow, 1997).

Figure 1. Distribution of HAB phenomena responsible for human illnesses in the U.S. (Source: U.S. National
Office for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algal Blooms.)

Distribution of HAB Phenomena in the United States. With the exception of AZP, all of the
poisoning syndromes described above are known problems within the U.S. and its territories,
affecting large expanses of coastline (Fig. 1). PSP occurs in all coastal New England states as
well as New York, extending to offshore areas in the northeast, and along much of the west coast
from Alaska to northern California. Overall, PSP affects more U.S. coastline than any other algal
bloom problem. NSP occurs annually along Gulf of Mexico coasts, with the most frequent
outbreaks along western Florida and Texas. Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina and Alabama
have also been affected intermittently, causing extensive losses to the oyster industry and killing
birds and marine mammals. ASP has been a problem for all of the U.S. Pacific coast states. The
ASP toxin has been detected in shellfish on the east coast as well, and in plankton from Gulf of
Mexico waters. DSP is largely unknown in the U.S., but a major outbreak was recently reported
along the Texas coast, resulting in an extensive closure of shellfish beds in that area. Human
health problems from Pfiesteria and related species are thus far poorly documented, but some are
thought to have affected laboratory workers, fishermen, and others working in or exposed to
estuarine waters in several portions of the southeastern U.S. CFP is the most frequently reported
non-bacterial illness associated with eating fish in the U.S. and its territories, but the number of
cases is probably far higher, because reporting to the U.S. Center for Disease Control is
voluntary and there is no confirmatory laboratory test. In the Virgin Islands, it is estimated that
nearly 50% of the adults have been poisoned at least once, and some estimate that 20,000 –
40,000 individuals are poisoned by ciguatera annually in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands
alone. CFP occurs in virtually all sub-tropical to tropical U.S. waters (i.e., Florida, Texas,
Hawaii, Guam, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and many Pacific Territories). As tropical fish are
increasingly exported to distant markets, ciguatera has become a worldwide problem.

Economic and Societal Impacts. HABs have a wide array of economic impacts, including the
costs of conducting routine monitoring programs for shellfish and other affected resources, short-term and permanent closure of harvestable shellfish and fish stocks, reductions in seafood sales
(including the avoidance of “safe” seafoods as a result of over-reaction to health advisories),
mortalities of wild and farmed fish, shellfish, submerged aquatic vegetation and coral reefs,
impacts on tourism and tourism-related businesses, and medical treatment of exposed
populations. A conservative estimate of the average annual economic impact resulting from
HABs in the U.S. is approximately $82 million (Hoagland and Scatasta 2006). Cumulatively, the
costs of HABs exceed a billion dollars over the last several decades. These estimates do not
include the application of “multipliers” that are often used to account for the manner in which
money transfers through a local economy. With multipliers, the estimate of HAB impacts in the
United States would increase several fold. Furthermore, individual bloom events can approach
the annual average, as occurred for example in 2005 when a massive bloom of Alexandrium
species along the New England coast closed shellfish beds from Maine to southern
Massachusetts. The impact to the Massachusetts shellfish industry alone was estimated by the
state Division of Marine Fisheries to be $50M, with similar large impacts occurring in Maine.
Additional unquantified losses were experienced by the tourist industry and by restaurants and
seafood retailers, as consumers often avoided all seafood from the region, despite assurances that
no toxins had been detected in many of these seafood products.

Recent Trends. The nature of the HAB problem has changed considerably over the last several
decades in the U.S. Virtually every coastal state is now threatened by harmful or toxic algal
species, whereas 30 - 40 years ago, the problem was much more scattered and sporadic (Fig. 2.).
The number of toxic blooms, the economic losses from them, the types of resources affected, and
the number of toxins and toxic species have all increased dramatically in recent years in the U.S.
and around the world (Anderson, 1989; Hallegraeff, 1993).

The first thought of many is that pollution or other human activities are the main reason for this
expansion, yet in the U.S. at least, many of the “new” or expanded HAB problems have occurred
in waters where pollution is not an obvious factor. Some new bloom events likely reflect
indigenous populations that have been discovered because of better detection methods and more
observers rather than new species introductions or dispersal events (Anderson, 1989).

Other “spreading events” are most easily attributed to dispersal via natural currents, while it is
also clear that man may have contributed to the global HAB expansion by transporting toxic
species in ship ballast water (Hallegraeff and Bolch, 1992). The U.S. Coast Guard, EPA, and the
International Maritime Organization are all working toward ballast water control and treatment
regulations that will attempt to reduce the threat of species introductions worldwide.

Another factor underlying the global expansion of HABs is the dramatic increase in aquaculture
activities. This leads to increased monitoring of product quality and safety, revealing indigenous
toxic algae that were probably always present (Anderson, 1989). The construction of aquaculture
facilities also places fish or shellfish resources in areas where toxic algal species occur but were
previously unknown, leading to mortality events or toxicity outbreaks that would not have been
noticed had the aquaculture facility not been placed there.

Of considerable concern,
particularly for coastal resource
managers, is the potential
relationship between the apparent
increase in HABs and the
accelerated eutrophication of
coastal waters due to human
activities (Anderson et al., 2002).
As mentioned above, some HAB
outbreaks occur in pristine waters
with no influence from pollution or
other anthropogenic effects, but
linkages between HABs and
eutrophication have been frequently
noted within the past several
decades (e.g., Smayda, 1990).
Coastal waters are receiving
massive and increasing quantities
of industrial, agricultural and
sewage effluents through a variety
of pathways. In many urbanized
coastal regions, these
anthropogenic inputs have altered
the size and composition of the
nutrient pool which may, in turn,
create a more favorable nutrient
environment for certain HAB
species. Just as the application of
fertilizer to lawns can enhance
grass growth, marine algae can
grow in response to various types
of nutrient inputs. Shallow and
restricted coastal waters that are
poorly flushed appear to be most
susceptible to nutrient-related algal
problems. Nutrient enrichment of
such systems often leads to
eutrophication and increased
frequencies and magnitudes of
phytoplankton blooms, including HABs. There is no doubt that this is true in certain areas of the
world where pollution has increased dramatically. A prominent example is the area of the East
China Sea near Qingdao – where sailing activities in the forthcoming Olympics are threatened by
mass quantities of seaweed that are a direct result of unchecked coastal pollution. This problem
is real, but less evident in areas where coastal pollution is more gradual and unobtrusive.
Figure 2. Expansion of HAB outbreaks over the past 36 years in the
U.S. (Source: U.S. National Office for Marine Biotoxins and Harmful
Algal Blooms.

It is now clear that the worldwide expansion of HAB phenomena is in part a reflection of our
ability to better define the boundaries of an existing problem. Those boundaries are also
expanding, however, due to natural species dispersal via storms or currents, as well as to humanassisted
species dispersal, and enhanced HAB population growth as a result of pollution or other
anthropogenic influences. The fact that part of the expansion is a result of increased awareness
should not temper our concern. The HAB problem in the U.S. is serious, large, and growing. It
is a much larger problem than we thought it was several decades ago.

Progress and Status of Our National Program on HABs

More than a decade ago, the U.S. approach to research on marine HABS was uncoordinated
and
modest in scale. Research groups were few and their work was piecemeal and constrained
by
small budgets that fluctuated with the sporadic blooms that would occur. There
were virtually no
U.S. government laboratories involved in HAB research. Funding for academic scientists
was
largely available through competitions within the entire oceanographic community
since there
were no targeted funding programs for HABs. This situation changed dramatically
with the
formulation of a National Plan (Marine Biotoxins and Harmful Algal Blooms; A National
Plan;
Anderson et al., 1993). This plan, the result of a workshop involving academic
and federal
scientists, as well as agency officials, and industry representatives, identified
major impediments
to the goal of science-based management of resources affected by HABs, and made
recommendations on the steps needed to remove those impediments. These impediments
have
been addressed to varying degrees with funding programs targeting specific topic
areas within
the broad field of HABs and their impacts. It is my belief that the National Plan
has been a major
success, leading to the creation of several multi-agency partnerships for HAB
studies, and to
many individual agency initiatives on this topic. Two national, extramural HAB
funding
programs, Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms (ECOHAB) and Monitoring and Event Response
for Harmful Algal Blooms (MERHAB), have together funded approximately $100 million
in
marine HAB research since the programs began in 1996 and 2000, respectively. Another
partnership between the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)
and the
National Science Foundation (NSF) has supported four Centers for Oceans and Human
Health
that include significant HAB research and outreach activities. NOAA has also created
an Oceans
and Human Health Initiative (OHHI) that supports extramural research and focused
activities at
three federal OHHI centers. These are just a few of many programs and activities
that were
motivated by the 1993 National Plan.

Research And Management Progress

With the advent of ECOHAB, MERHAB, the OHH programs, and other national HAB
programs, resources have been directed towards the goal of scientifically based
management of
coastal waters and fisheries that are potentially impacted by HABs. These activities
have already
made a significant contribution to HAB management capabilities in the U.S. Here
I will
highlight several advances in our understanding of HAB phenomena, as well as some
of the
program-derived technological developments that are providing new tools to coastal
resource
managers in regions impacted by HABs.

Enhanced understanding of HAB dynamics

In areas studied by the multi-investigator ECOHAB-funded regional research projects,
HAB
phenomena are now far better understood than was the case just 10 years ago when
the program
began. Knowledge is also increasing for HABs in other areas through smaller, targeted
research
projects. In the Gulf of Maine, the focus of the ECOHAB-GOM and GOMTOX regional
programs, survey cruises, experimental and process studies, and numerical models
have led to
the development of a conceptual model of bloom dynamics that is consistent with
observations
of Alexandrium cell distributions, and with patterns of toxicity in shellfish
along much of the
New England coast (Anderson et al., 2005). A key feature of this model is the
strong influence
of dormant resting cysts in bottom sediments on bloom magnitude. Cysts in several
large
accumulation zones or “seedbeds” germinate in the spring and re-populate
the water column with
swimming Alexandrium cells, which then multiply and cause the annual PSP outbreaks.
Major
bloom transport pathways in the Maine Coastal Current system have also been identified,
with
delivery of the toxic algal cells to shore influenced by the patterns and strength
of onshore- and
offshore-oriented wind events.

In the Gulf of Mexico, the ECOHAB-Florida program identified transport and delivery
mechanisms for the toxic Karenia cells that kill fish, cause shellfish to become
toxic, and release
an irritating aerosol that drives residents and tourists from beaches. In particular,
the Karenia
cells are now thought to be transported onshore in deeper waters through wind
events that cause
“upwelling”. Special bathymetric features of the ocean bottom can
facilitate this transport and
focus cell delivery to areas known to be the sites of recurrent blooms. Studies
of nutrient uptake
by Karenia and surveys of nutrient concentrations in the region are addressing
the sensitive and
highly controversial issue of the potential link between red tide blooms and nutrient
inputs from
land, including those associated with agriculture and other human activities.
This ongoing
research has obvious implications to policy decisions concerning pollution and
water quality in
the region.

Consistent with the identification of “source regions” for Gulf of
Maine and Gulf of Mexico
HABs, researchers in the Pacific Northwest have identified an area west of Puget
Sound that
appears to accumulate toxic diatoms responsible for outbreaks of amnesic shellfish
poisoning
(ASP), a debilitating illness that includes permanent loss of short-term memory
in some victims.
Other programs have been equally productive in identifying underlying driving
mechanisms for
HAB blooms, such as the brown tide blooms in New York and New Jersey. These dense
accumulations of tiny Aureococcus anophagefferens cells turn the water a deep
brown, blocking
sunlight to submerged vegetation, and altering the feeding behavior of shellfish.
These blooms
have been linked to certain types of nutrients that seem to favor the causative
organism – in
particular “organic” forms of nitrogen that are preferred by the brown
tide cells, and give it a
competitive advantage in certain locations.

Improved monitoring and detection of HAB cells and toxins

These are but a few of the advances in understanding that have accrued from ECOHAB
regional
funding. Equally important are the discoveries that provide management tools to
reduce the
impacts of HABs on coastal resources. Management options for dealing with the
impacts of 8
HABs include reducing their incidence and extent (prevention), stopping or containing
blooms
(control), and minimizing impacts (mitigation). Where possible, it is preferable
to prevent HABs
rather than to treat their symptoms. Since increased pollution and nutrient loading
may enhance
the growth of some HAB species, these events may be prevented by reducing pollution
inputs to
coastal waters, particularly industrial, agricultural, and domestic effluents
high in plant nutrients.
This is especially important in shallow, poorly flushed coastal waters that are
most susceptible to
nutrient-related algal problems. As mentioned above, research on the links between
certain
HABs and nutrients has highlighted the importance of non-point sources of nutrients
(e.g., from
agricultural activities, fossil-fuel combustion, and animal feeding operations).

The most effective HAB management tools are monitoring programs that involve sampling
and
testing of wild or cultured seafood products directly from the natural environment,
as this allows
unequivocal tracking of toxins to their site of origin and targeted regulatory
action. Numerous
monitoring programs of this type have been established in U.S. coastal waters,
typically by state
agencies. This monitoring has become quite expensive, however, due to the proliferation
of
toxins and potentially affected resources. States are faced with flat or declining
budgets and yet
need to monitor for a growing list of HAB toxins and potentially affected fisheries
resources.
Technologies are thus urgently needed to facilitate the detection and characterization
of HAB
cells and blooms.

One very useful technology that has been developed through recent HAB research
relies on
species- or strain-specific “probes” that can be used to label only
the HAB cells of interest so
they can then be detected visually, electronically, or chemically. Progress has
been rapid and
probes of several different types are now available for many of the harmful algae,
along with
techniques for their application in the rapid and accurate identification, enumeration,
and
isolation of individual species. One example of the direct application of this
technology in
operational HAB monitoring is for the New York and New Jersey brown tide organism,
Aureococcus anophagefferens. The causative organism is so small and non-descript
that it is
virtually impossible to identify and count cells using traditional microscopic
techniques.
Antibody probes were developed that bind only to A. anophagefferens cells, and
these are now
used routinely in monitoring programs run by state and local authorities, greatly
improving
counting time and accuracy.

These probes are being incorporated into a variety of different assay systems,
including some
that can be mounted on buoys and left unattended while they robotically sample
the water and
test for HAB cells. Clustered with other instruments that measure the physical,
chemical, and
optical characteristics of the water column, information can be collected and
used to make “algal
forecasts” of impending toxicity. These instruments are taking advantage
of advances in ocean
optics, as well as the new molecular and analytical methodologies that allow the
toxic cells or
chemicals (such as HAB toxins) to be detected with great sensitivity and specificity.
A clear
need has been identified for improved instrumentation for HAB cell and toxin detection,
and
additional resources are needed in this regard. This can be accomplished during
development of
the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) for U.S. coastal waters, and through
a targeted
research program on HAB prevention, control, and mitigation (see below). These
are needed if
we are to achieve our vision of future HAB monitoring and management programs
– an
integrated system that includes arrays of moored instruments as sentinels along
the U.S.
coastline, detecting HABs as they develop and radioing the information to resource
managers.
Just as in weather forecasting, this information can be assimilated into numerical
models to
improve forecast accuracy

Prediction and forecasting of HABs

A long-term goal of HAB monitoring programs is to develop the ability to forecast
or predict
bloom development and movement. Prediction of HAB outbreaks requires physical/biological
numerical models which account for both the growth and behavior of the toxic algal
species, as
well as the movement and dynamics of the surrounding water. Numerical models of
coastal
circulation are advancing rapidly in the U.S., and a number of these are beginning
to incorporate
HAB dynamics as well. A model developed to simulate the dynamics of the organism
responsible for paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) outbreaks in the Gulf of Maine
is relatively
far advanced in this regard (McGillicuddy et al., 2005), and is now being transitioned
from
academic use towards an operational mode. Earlier this year, my colleagues and
I were able to
successfully predict a major regional PSP outbreak in the Gulf of Maine on the
basis of our cyst
mapping and modeling activities (www.whoi.edu/page.do?pid=24039&tid=282&cid=41211).
This is the first time a major HAB event has been predicted several months in
advance, and is
strong testimony to the benefits of the ECOHAB program’s regional research
emphasis. Our
numerical model for Alexandrium bloom dynamics is now being used to provide weekly
nowcasts/forecasts to managers and other stakeholders affected by PSP outbreaks
in the region,
and is slated to be used by NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) as the basis
of an operational
HAB forecasting system for the Gulf of Maine.

In the Gulf of Mexico, satellite images of ocean color are now used to detect
and track toxic red
tides of Karenia brevis. Based on research results from the ECOHAB-Florida program,
bloom
forecast bulletins are now being provided to affected states in the Gulf of Mexico
by the NOAA
NOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment. The bulletins (see
http://www.csc.noaa.gov/crs/habf/) are based on the integration of several data
sources: satellite
ocean color imagery; wind data from coastal meteorological stations; field observations
of bloom
location and intensity provided by the states of Florida and Texas; and weather
forecasts from
the National Weather Service. The combination of warning and rapid detection is
a significant
aid to the Gulf states in responding to these blooms.

Mitigation and control strategies

Other practical strategies to mitigate the impacts of HAB events include: regulating
the siting of
aquaculture facilities to avoid areas where HAB species are present, modifying
water circulation
for those locations where restricted water exchange is a factor in bloom development,
and
restricting species introductions (e.g., through regulations on ballast water
discharges or shellfish
and finfish transfers for aquaculture). Each of these strategies requires fundamental
research
such as that being conducted in our national HAB program. Potential approaches
to directly
control or suppress HABs are under development as well - similar to methods used
to control
pests on land – e.g., biological, physical, or chemical treatments that
directly target the bloom
cells. One example is work conducted in my own laboratory, again through ECOHAB
support,
using ordinary clay to control HABs. When certain clays are dispersed on the water
surface, the
tiny clay particles aggregate with each other and with other particles, including
HAB cells. The
aggregates then settle to the ocean bottom, carrying the unwanted HAB cells from
the surface
waters where they would otherwise grow and cause harm. As with many other new
technologies
for HABs, initial results are quite promising and small-scale field trials are
underway, but
continued support is needed to fully evaluate benefits, costs, and environmental
impacts.

Another intriguing bloom control strategy is being evaluated for the brown tide
problem. It has
been suggested that one reason the brown tides appeared about 15-20 years ago
was that hard
clams and other shellfish stocks have been depleted by overfishing in certain
areas. Removal of
these resources altered the manner in which those waters were “grazed”
- i.e., shellfish filter
large quantities of water during feeding, and that removes many microscopic organisms
from the
water, including natural predators of the brown tide cells. If this hypothesis
is valid, a logical
bloom control strategy would be to re-seed shellfish in the affected areas, and
to restrict
harvesting. Pilot projects are now underway to explore this control strategy in
Long Island.

In general, bloom control is an area where very little research effort has been
directed in the U.S.
(Anderson, 1997), and considerable research is needed before these means are used
to control
HABs in natural waters given the high sensitivity for possible damage to coastal
ecosystem and
water quality by the treatments. As discussed below, this could be accomplished
as part of a
separate national program on HAB prevention, control, and mitigation.

Programmatic Needs

The 1993 National Plan is outdated. Some of its recommendations have been fulfilled, while
others remain partially or completely unaddressed. Concurrently, the nature and extent of the
U.S. HAB problem changed with the emergence of several new poisoning syndromes, the
expansion of known problems into new areas, and the identification of a variety of new HAB
impacts and affected resources. Furthermore, while new scientific understanding taught us that
HABs and the toxins they produce are complex in their mode of action and that the ecosystems
in which they proliferate are equally complex, decision-making and management systems did not
change to reflect that complexity. Likewise, many new tools to detect HAB cells and their toxins
have been developed, but are not fully tested or incorporated into existing research, management,
and ocean observation programs. These and other considerations led to the decision to revise
and update the National Plan. Several hundred scientists and managers, from a wide array of
fields, contributed to the knowledge base on which this new national science and management
strategy is based. Over a two-year period, an intensive collaborative effort was undertaken,
including an open forum discussion among 200 participants at the U.S. National HAB
Symposium, a detailed web-based questionnaire yielding more that 1,000 targeted responses, a
workshop of 50 U.S. HAB experts, an Advisory Committee to guide, and a Steering Committee
to assemble and review the most current information available for use in developing the new
plan.

Our new national plan is called HARRNESS (Harmful Algal Research and Response: A
National Environmental Science Strategy 2005-2015; Ramsdell et al., 2005). This is the
framework that will guide U.S. HAB research and monitoring well into the future, and is one that
I enthusiastically support.

At the conceptual level, HARRNESS is a framework of initiatives and programs that identify
and address current and evolving needs associated with HABs and their impacts. Four major
areas of research focus have been defined in HARRNESS: Bloom Ecology and Dynamics, Toxins
and Their Effects, Food Webs and Fisheries, and Public Health and Socioeconomic Impacts.
Each shares a need for a set of management and research activities directed at various scales of
the HAB problem. These include highly focused or targeted research studies, regional and interregional
scale investigations, and policy-making and resource management activities towards
mitigation and control. Progress will be facilitated through the development of activities and
services (Infrastructure) required by multiple program foci.

At the programmatic level, several of the existing national programs will continue to function,
and new programs will need to be added. In the former category, ECOHAB will continue to
address the fundamental processes underlying the impacts and population dynamics of HABs.
This involves a recognition of the many factors at the organismal level that determine how HAB
species respond to, and potentially alter their environment, the manner in which HAB species
affect or are affected by food-web interactions, and how the distribution, abundance, and impact
of HAB species are regulated by the environment. ECOHAB was established as a competitive,
peer-reviewed research program supported by an interagency partnership involving NOAA,
NSF, EPA, ONR, and NASA. Research results have been brought into practical applications
through MERHAB, a program formulated to transfer technologies and foster innovative
monitoring programs and rapid response by public agencies and health departments. MERHAB
will also continue under the new HARRNESS framework.

Two relatively new programs (the Centers for Oceans and Human Health (COHH) initiative of
NIEHS and NSF and NOAA’s OHHI) are being enthusiastically received by the scientific,
management and public health communities, and thus are expected to continue under
HARRNESS. They fill an important niche by creating linkages between members of the ocean
sciences and biomedical communities to help both groups address the public health aspects
of HABs. The COHH focus on HABs, infectious diseases, and marine natural products, whereas
the NOAA OHHI Centers and extramural funding include these subjects in addition to chemical
pollutants, coastal water quality and beach safety, seafood quality, sentinel species as indicators
of both potential human health risks and human impact on marine systems. The partnership
between NIEHS, NSF, and NOAA clearly needs to be sustained and expanded in order to
provide support to a network of sufficient size to address the significant problems under the
OHH umbrella. This is best accomplished through additional funds to these agencies, as well as
through the involvement of other agencies with interests in oceans and human health, including,
for example, EPA, NASA, FDA, and CDC.

A number of the recommendations of HARRNESS are not adequately addressed by existing
programs, however. As a result, the HAB community needs to work with Congressional staff and
agency program managers to create new programs, as well as to modify existing ones,
where appropriate. For example, a separate program on HABs and food web impacts could focus
resources on this important topic area in a way that is not presently possible through ECOHAB.
Chemistry and toxicology of HABs, the underlying basis to the adverse consequences of HABs,
receives only piecemeal funding through support of other HAB efforts and requires focused
attention and a targeted funding initiative. Likewise the practical aspects of HAB prevention,
control and mitigation are also presently, but inadequately included in ECOHAB. This program
is discussed in more detail below.

With the exception of the Great Lakes, which fall under NOAA’s jurisdiction, freshwater
systems that are impacted by HABs have not been comprehensively addressed in ECOHAB,
MERHAB, or the OHH HAB programs. This is because NOAA’s mandate includes the great
Lakes and estuaries up to the freshwater interface, but does not include the many rivers, ponds,
lakes, and reservoirs that are subject to freshwater HAB problems. Freshwater HABs are an
important focus within HARRNESS, and therefore targeted (and separate) legislation and
funding initiatives on freshwater HABs are needed.

The support provided to HAB research through ECOHAB, MERHAB, Sea Grant, and other
national programs has had a tremendous impact on our understanding of HAB phenomena, and
on the development of management tools and strategies. Funding for ECOHAB is modest, but it
is administered in a scientifically rigorous manner that maximizes research progress. Several 5-
year ECOHAB regional research projects have ended, and new ones are beginning. HAB
phenomena are complex oceanographic phenomena, and a decade or more of targeted research
are needed for each of the major poisoning syndromes or regions. ECOHAB support for regional
studies must be sustained and expanded, and this will require a commitment of resources well in
excess of those currently available. Underlying this recommendation is the recognition that we
need to form multiple skilled research teams with the equipment and facilities required to attack
the complex scientific issues involved in HAB phenomena. Since HAB problems facing the
U.S. are diverse with respect to the causative species, the affected resources, the toxins involved,
and the oceanographic systems and habitats in which the blooms occur, we need multiple teams
of skilled researchers and managers distributed throughout the country. This argues against
funding that ebbs and floods with the sporadic pattern of HAB outbreaks or that focuses
resources in one region while others go begging. I cannot emphasize too strongly the need for
an equitable distribution of resources that is consistent with the scale and extent of the
national problem, and that is sustained through time. This is the only way to keep research
teams intact, forming the core of expertise and knowledge that leads to scientific progress. To
achieve this balance, we need a scientifically based allocation of resources, not one based on
political jurisdictions. This is possible if we work within the guidelines of HARRNESS and with
the inter-agency effort that has been guiding its implementation.

A National Program on Prevention, Control, and Mitigation of HABs

Congress mandated a program for HAB Prevention, Control and Management in the legislation
reauthorizing the Harmful Algal Bloom and Hypoxia Research and Control Act of 1998
(HABHRCA). The strong Congressional support behind this program element is further seen in
a section of HABHRCA that directs NOAA to “identify innovative response measures for the
prevention, control, and mitigation of harmful algal blooms and identify steps needed for
their development and implementation.” Further rationale for this program is that much of the
focus of past HAB research has been on fundamental aspects of organism physiology, ecology,
and toxicology, so less effort has been directed towards practical issues such as resource
management strategies, or even direct bloom suppression or control (Anderson, 1997). To meet
this Congressional directive, a workshop was held, and a science agenda prepared for Harmful
Algal Bloom Research, Development, Demonstration, and Technology Transfer (RDDTT). The
Executive Summary of this report is appended here as Annex 1. Another common name for this
program is MACHAB (Mitigation and Control of Harmful Algal Blooms).

The proposed RDDTT program has three essential components. These are 1) an extramural
funding program focused on development, demonstration, and technology transfer of methods
for prevention, control, and mitigation (PCM) of HABs; 2) a comprehensive national HAB
Event Response program: and 3) a Core Infrastructure program. These components are
interdependent and critical for improving future HAB response.

The PCM component of the RDDTT Program focuses on moving promising technologies and
strategies arising from HAB research from development through demonstration to technology
transfer and field application by end users. The Event Response component improves access to
existing resources through better information sharing, communication, and coordination and
provides essential new resources. Researching and implementing new PCM strategies and
improving event response will not be possible without enhancing infrastructure, including 1)
increasing availability of adequate analytical facilities, reference and research materials, toxin
standards, culture collections, tissue banks, technical training, and access to data; 2) improving
integration of HAB activities with existing monitoring and emerging observational programs;
and 3) enhancing communication and regional and national coordination.

The need and community readiness for the three RDDTT program elements varies with the status
of existing research and the planning required for each activity. The RDDTT program can,
therefore, be implemented in stages, with projected funding needs increasing as the components
mature. Implementation requires both changes in authorizing legislation and increases in
appropriations. Although RDDTT will be the program that the public will most readily perceive
as ‘progress’ in the management of HABs, the program is part of an integrated approach to HAB
risk management that includes other research and response programs. Thus, it is essential that
the RDDTT program be established as a separate element within the national HAB
program (HARRNESS), with the expectation that related HAB research and response
programs will provide the new technologies and approaches as well as the ecological and
oceanographic context to guide its practical and applied activities. Since many agencies are
involved in HAB research and response, it will be necessary to specify that the RDDTT Program
is an interagency program and to provide funding to agencies with major roles. In addition to
NOAA and NSF, other agencies, such as FDA, CDC, NSF, NIEHS, and USGS also contribute
substantially and should be named as partners in the national HAB program.

Summary and Recommendations

The diverse nature of HAB phenomena and the hydrodynamic and geographic variability
associated with different outbreaks throughout the U.S. pose a significant constraint to the
development of a coordinated national HAB program. Nevertheless, the combination of
planning, coordination, and a highly compelling topic with great societal importance has initiated
close cooperation between officials, government scientists and academics in a sustained attack
on the HAB problem. The rate and extent of progress from here will depend upon how well the
different federal agencies continue to work together, and on how effectively the skills and
expertise of government and academic scientists can be targeted on priority topics that have not
been well represented in the national HAB program. The opportunity for cooperation is clear,
since as stated in the ECOHAB science plan (Anderson, 1995), “Nowhere else do the missions
and goals of so many government agencies intersect and interact as in the coastal zone where
HAB phenomena are prominent.” The HAB community in the U.S. has matured scientifically
and politically, and is fully capable of undertaking the new challenges inherent in an expanded
national program, exemplified in HARRNESS. This will be successful only if a coordinated
interagency effort can be implemented to focus research personnel, facilities, and financial
resources to the common goals of a comprehensive national strategy.
In summary:

Marine HABs are a serious and growing problem in the U.S., affecting every coastal
state; freshwater HABS are an equally significant problem in inland states. HABs impact
public health, fisheries, aquaculture, tourism, and coastal aesthetics. HAB problems will
not go away and will likely increase in severity.

HABs are just one of many problems in the coastal zone that are affected by nutrient
inputs and over-enrichment from land. They represent a highly visible indicator of the
health of our coastal ocean. More subtle impacts to fisheries and ecosystems are likely
occurring that are far more difficult to discern.

A coordinated national HAB Program was created over 15 years ago and partially
implemented. That National Plan is now outdated, and as a result, a new plan called
HARRNESS has been formulated to guide the next decade or more of activities in HAB
research and management.

At the programmatic level, several of the existing national partnerships (e.g., ECOHAB,
MERHAB, COHH, OHHI) should be sustained and expanded within HARRNESS, and
new programs will need to be added. In the latter context, a separate program on HABs
and food web impacts could focus resources on this important topic area in a way that is
not presently possible through ECOHAB. The chemistry and toxicology of HABs
requires focused attention and a targeted funding initiative. Likewise the practical
aspects of HAB prevention, control and mitigation need to be implemented through a
targeted program.

State agencies are doing an excellent job protecting public health and fisheries, but those
monitoring programs are facing growing challenges. Needs for the future include new
technologies for HAB monitoring and forecasting and incorporation of these tools into
regional Ocean Observing Systems.

Recommendations:

Sustain and enhance support for the national HAB program HARRNESS.

Sustain and enhance support for the ECOHAB, MERHAB and OHH programs, and
implement new programs, such as Prevention, Control and Mitigation of HABs (RDDTT
or MACHAB) that include Event Response and Infrastructure elements.

Encourage interagency partnerships, as the HAB problem transcends the resources or
mandate of any single agency

Identify and authorize freshwater programs that would fall under the purview of relevant
agencies, such as EPA, in addition to the marine and coastal programs authorized in
NOAA. Separate funding lines are needed since NOAA has a geographic mandate that
includes marine coastal waters and the upper reaches of estuaries, and the Great Lakes.
Many freshwater HAB problems fall outside these boundaries, however, and therefore
will need to be supported through separate appropriations.

Support methods and instrument development for land- and mooring-based cell and toxin
detection, and for bloom forecasting through instrument development support for the
Integrated Ocean Observing System.

Support appropriations that are commensurate with the scale of the HAB problem. The
national HAB program is well established and productive, but it needs additional
resources if new topics, responsibilities and tasks are added through new legislation.
Research should be peer-reviewed and competitive, and should take full advantage of the
extensive capabilities of the extramural research community.

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my testimony. Thank you for the opportunity to offer information
that is based on my own research and policy activities, as well as on the collective wisdom and
creativity of numerous colleagues in the HAB field. I would be pleased to answer any questions
that you or other members may have.

Files

Written testimony by Dr. Donald M. Anderson
Senior Scientist, Biology Department presented to the Committee on Science and Technology, Subcommittee on Energy and Environment U.S. House of Representatives
July 10, 2008
(pdf format)

The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution is dedicated to research and education to advance understanding of the ocean and its interaction with the Earth system, and to communicating this understanding for the benefit of society. Learn more »